Austin v Commonwealth

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJ,GAUDRON, McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY AND HAYNE JJROBERT PETER AUSTIN & ANOR  PLAINTIFFSANDTHE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA  DEFENDANTAustin v The Commonwealth of Australia[2003] HCA 35 February 2003M10/2001ORDERAnswer questions in Stated Case as follows:Question 1On their true construction, do the Superannuation Contributions Tax (Members of Constitutionally Protected Superannuation Funds) Imposition Act 1997 (Cth) and the Superannuation Contributions Tax (Members of Constitutionally Protected Superannuation Funds) Assessment and Collection Act 1997 (Cth):(a) make the First Plaintiff liable to pay superannuation contributions surcharge in respect of surchargeable contributions reported for the financial years ending 30 June 1999 and 30 June 2000?(b) make the Second Plaintiff liable to pay superannuation contributions surcharge in respect of surchargeable contributions reported for the financial years ending 30 June 1997, 30 June 1998, 30 June 1999 and 30 June 2000?Answer(a)  Yes.(b)  No.Question 2If so, are the Superannuation Contributions Tax (Members of Constitutionally Protected Superannuation Funds) Imposition Act 1997 (Cth) and/or the Superannuation Contributions Tax (Members of Constitutionally Protected Superannuation Funds) Assessment and Collection Act 1997 (Cth) invalid in their application to the First Plaintiff and/or the Second Plaintiff: (a)  on the ground that they so discriminate against the States of the Commonwealth, or so place a particular disability or burden upon the operations and activities of the States, as to be beyond the legislative power of the Commonwealth;(b)  on the ground that the first-named Act imposes a liability to pay superannuation contributions surcharge:(i)by reference to criteria which are so incapable of ascertainment or lacking in general application;(ii)as...